HUDRD CDBG Disaster Recovery Outcomes of Renter Households NOFO.pdf

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

Policy Development and Research

HUDRD CDBG Disaster Recovery Outcomes of Renter Households

FR-6600-N-29A

07/11/2022

Table of Contents Summary

Overview

I. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION

A. Program Description

B. Authority

II. Award Information

A. Available Funds

B. Number of Awards

C. Minimum/Maximum Award Information

D. Period of Performance

E. Type of Funding Instrument

III. Eligibility Information

A. Eligible Applicants

B. Ineligible Applicants

C. Cost Sharing or Matching

D. Threshold Eligibility Requirements

E. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements Affecting Eligibility

F. Program-Specific Requirements

G. Criteria for Beneficiaries

IV. Application and Submission Information

A. Obtaining an Application Package

B. Content and Form of Application Submission

C. System for Award Management (SAM) and Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) Dun and Bradstreet Universal Numbering System (DUNS) Number

D. Application Submission Dates and Times

E. Intergovernmental Review

F. Funding Restrictions

G. Other Submission Requirements

V. Application Review Information

A. Review Criteria

B. Review and Selection Process

VI. Award Administration Information

A. Award Notices

B. Administrative, National and Department Policy Requirements and Terms for HUD Recipients Financial Assistance Awards

C. Reporting

D. Debriefing

VII. Agency Contact(s)

VIII. Other Information

APPENDIX

Program Office:

Policy Development and Research Funding Opportunity Title:

HUDRD CDBG Disaster Recovery Outcomes of Renter Households Funding Opportunity Number:

FR-6600-N-29A

Assistance Listing Number:

14.536 Due Date for Applications:

07/11/2022 Summary The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Strategic Plan sets the direction and focus of our programs and staff to create strong, sustainable, inclusive communities and quality, affordable homes for all.

HUD's Strategic Goals HUD’s FY 2022-2026 Strategic Plan lays out this administration’s strategy for ensuring everyone has an affordable, healthy place to live. Over the course of the next four years HUD will pursue two overarching priorities focused on increasing equity and improving customer experience across all HUD programs. Five strategic goals undergird the Plan as follows:

Strategic Goal 1: Support Underserved Communities Strategic Goal 2: Ensure Access to and Increase the Production of Affordable Housing Strategic Goal 3: Promote Homeownership Strategic Goal 4: Advance Sustainable Communities Strategic Goal 5: Strengthen HUD’s Internal Capacity

The five goals of the FY 2022-2026 Strategic Plan present the core vision of what we hope to accomplish, the strategies to accomplish those objectives, and the indicators of success.

Overview The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) issues this Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) to invite applications from eligible applicants for the program and purpose described within this NOFO. Prospective applicants should carefully read all instructions in all sections to avoid sending an incomplete or ineligible application. HUD funding is highly competitive. Failure to respond accurately to any submission requirement could result in an incomplete or noncompetitive proposal.

During the selection process HUD is prohibited from disclosing 1) information regarding any applicant’s relative standing, 2) the amount of assistance requested by an applicant, and 3) any information contained in the application. Prior to the application deadline, HUD may not disclose the identity of any applicant or the number of applicants that have applied for assistance.

For Further Information Regarding this NOFO: Please direct questions regarding the specific requirements of this NOFO to the office contact identified in Section VII.

Paperwork Reduction Act Statement. The information collection requirements in this notice have been approved by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501- 3520). In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless the collection displays a valid OMB control number. Each NOFO will identify its applicable OMB control number unless its collection of information is excluded from these requirements under 5 CFR part 1320.

OMB Approval Number(s):

2528-0299

I. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION.

A. Program Description.

Purpose

This NOFO announces the availability of $1,400,000 for two research projects (about $700,000 each). The goal of this research is to improve disaster recovery effectiveness for renter households by examining the disaster recovery outcomes of renter households and rental housing stock in places that received Community Development Block Grant-Disaster Recovery grants (CDBG-DR). In order to understand renter challenges and barriers that are exacerbated by disasters and ways that CDBG-DR may facilitate quicker and more comprehensive recovery of these households, two distinct studies are solicited here:

Project 1: Disaster Recovery Outcomes of Renter Households. A study on the recovery outcomes of renter households following disasters, the factors (including barriers to accessing recovery resources and mechanisms of Federal and local implementation of CDBG-DR grants), that can contribute to such outcomes, and the opportunities for changes to legislation, policy and program implementation that can improve upon such outcomes; and

Project 2: Post-disaster Impacts on Rental Housing Markets. A study on the short- and long-term impacts of disasters on renter housing stock that is affordable to low- or moderate-income households and assessment of initiatives that have attempted to prevent loss of affordable housing stock following disasters.

NOTE: Applicants may apply for one or both projects under this announcement. Applicants applying for more than one project must submit a separate application for each project.

Applicants may submit only one application per project. No person may be listed as a principal investigator on more than one application per project under this announcement. Applicants applying to both solicitations should not submit interdependent projects that assume funding awards for both. HUD anticipates funding two research projects with $700,000-budgets, but reserves the right to increase funding awarded for one study and decrease funding awarded for the other if an application for one project is particularly promising.

Overview The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (Public Law 116-260, approved December 27, 2020) provides funding to HUD for research and studies relating to disaster recovery that will allow the Department to evaluate the efficacy of its disaster recovery programs. We are soliciting https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-5/chapter-III/subchapter-B/part-1320?toc=1 proposals to conduct research on the disaster recovery outcomes of renter households and rental housing stock in places awarded CDBG-DR grants, the contributing factors and mechanisms driving recovery outcomes for renter households, and opportunities to improve upon them. The goal of the research is to illuminate ways by which Congress, HUD, and State and Local governments can mitigate the loss of affordable rental housing following disasters and facilitate faster and better recovery of renter households. This funding will do this through two distinct research projects:

1. Document the outcomes of renter households and examine possible mechanisms of Federal, state, and local level administration of CDBG-DR grants that may contribute to such outcomes, including disaster impact and needs assessments, grant allocations and Action Plan development, program design and eligibility criteria, citizen engagement practices, and barriers to access or participation in disaster recovery programs; and

2. Establish documentation of short- and long-term impacts of disasters (4-10 years, past analysis of housing recovery indicates a mean duration of time of 3.8 years between disaster event and 90% of housing activity grant funds expended, a proxy for activity completion.

See: https://www.huduser.gov/portal/publications/HousingRecovery-CDBG-DR.html) on rental housing stock and local housing markets and dynamics across multiple disaster impact sites, with assessment of the efficacy of Federal and other state and local efforts to prevent such reductions in affordable housing stock.

In both studies, research teams will examine potential opportunities for changes to legislation, policy and program implementation that can improve upon the disaster recovery outcomes of rental households, reduce barriers to participation, and preserve or expand the local affordable rental housing stock in post-disaster recovery scenarios. For the purposes of this research solicitation, the term “disaster” refers to Presidentially declared major disasters for which CDBG-DR is allocated by HUD. A list of such disasters and allocated grants can be found on HUD’s website here: https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/cdbg-dr/cdbg-dr-grantee-contact-information/#view-all-disasters. Both research projects are expected to result in recommended Federal, state, and local data collection as well as analysis and policy and programmatic solutions that may potentially improve recovery outcomes and support the preservation and expansion of affordable rental housing stock following disasters. This will facilitate the government’s role in ensuring all communities and demographic subgroups have the resources to recover.

Background HUD CDBG-DR funding has been appropriated by Congress following major Presidentially declared disasters when Congress deemed other aid and resources were not enough to meet the needs of the impacted community. After the President declares a disaster, Congress may request impact assessments from disaster recovery agencies and may use these data to appropriate additional emergency supplemental Federal disaster recovery funding, including CDBG-DR grants. When CDBG-DR funds are appropriated, HUD then calculates individual block grant amounts for impacted areas using needs data, including FEMA and SBA data, insurance data, and Census demographic data. HUD may choose to allocate funds to States, counties, municipal governments, or other local level entities. Notably, states can carry out housing activities through https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/cdbg-dr/cdbg-dr-grantee-contact-information/#view-all-disasters https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/cdbg-dr/cdbg-dr-grantee-contact-information/#view-all-disasters a method of distribution of funds to local government entities or they can carry out housing programs and projects directly (through employees, contractors, or subrecipients). CDBG-DR grantees can budget CDBG-DR funds at their discretion provided the action plan budget aligns with their impact and unmet needs assessments and with other CDBG-DR program requirements. For example, grantees must use funds that support community recovery through defined eligible activities that meet housing, economic, and infrastructure objectives. A recently published Federal Register Notice describes the rules and guidelines that typically apply to CDBG-DR grant administration.

“CDBG-DR funds are for necessary expenses for activities authorized under title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) (HCDA) related to disaster relief, long-term recovery, restoration of infrastructure and housing, economic revitalization, and mitigation in the “most impacted and distressed” (MID) areas resulting from a qualifying major disaster” (FR–6303–N–01, 2022).

Housing assistance is typically the most immediate priority of state and local governments and is often the largest budgeted activity. The intent of housing recovery programs is to ensure those whose homes were impacted by the disaster can return to safe and adequate housing or relocate to suitable housing elsewhere.

“Grantees may use CDBG-DR funds for activities that may include, but are not limited to, new construction, reconstruction, and rehabilitation of single-family or multifamily housing, homeownership assistance, buyouts, and rental assistance. The broadening of eligible CDBG- DR activities related to housing under the HCDA is necessary following major disasters in which housing, including large numbers of affordable housing units, have been damaged or destroyed.”

(FR–6303–N–01, 2022)

The process of calculating need following a disaster typically reflects the concepts of owned property. Renters’ losses include only personal property, even as broader rental market changes can impact their ability to find safe and adequate housing in proximity to their established communities. The framework guiding the allocation of recovery funds and the actions of grantees in receipt of Federal disaster assistance tends to focus on property losses and rehabilitation of real property. This framework targets rehabilitation funds of real rental property to landlords and owners of rental units, and can miss the unique needs of renter households, including costs of relocating to different communities, paying higher rents to stay in the same community, and non-quantifiable social costs faced by renters when their homes are damaged or destroyed and they are temporarily or permanently displaced.

A growing body of research literature and journalism calls attention to the impacts of disasters on and poor recovery outcomes of renter households, particularly low-income renters of color (Wilson, 2021; NPR, 2021; NYT, 2021). US disaster aid can reinforce or widen existing inequities (Elliott et al., 2020; Emrich et al., 2020; Howell and Elliott, 2019; Ratcliffe et al., 2019). Research has demonstrated that low-income renter households face distinct challenges following disaster, receive disproportionately lower disaster recovery aid, and can experience longer recovery timelines (GAO, 2010). Rental housing stock is impacted in complex ways and rental property owners often struggle to rehabilitate units, demolishing them or choosing to upgrade units and increase rents, which results in an overall loss of affordable rental units (Weicher et al., 2017; Aurand and Emmanuel, 2019; GAO, 2010; Dillon-Merrill et al., 2018). Further, renter households are also displaced from homes at rates much greater than homeowners (Hamideh and Rongerude, 2018; Vinogradasky, 2009), which can exact a variety of negative impacts on households that are not easily quantified in economic or financial terms. A longer displacement period can generate negative effects on the well-being of a population (Diaz, Kumar et al. 2015, Diaz, Behr et al. 2020). Despite research documenting these outcomes in specific post-disaster examples, there is no comprehensive study that has generalized occurrence of such outcomes across disaster impacted communities or the CDBG-DR portfolio.

Additionally, little is understood about how the specific mechanisms of disaster recovery aid – at all levels of government – may contribute to the disaster recovery outcomes of renter households or how they might drive improvements in recovery for these households. This is potentially due to the fact that Federal disaster recovery programs lack key information—data and analysis—that would allow them to examine patterns and indicators of potential access barriers and disparate recovery outcomes (GAO, 2021).

To respond to challenges for low-income renter households and losses to affordable rental housing stock following disaster, Congress has previously appropriated CDBG-DR funds that carry requirements for grantees to allocate specified portions of grants to affordable housing and HUD has separately required certain CDBG-DR grantees to coordinate disaster recovery funding with local public housing authorities (PHA). More recently, HUD has required grantees to describe how CDBG-DR grant funds will be used to support rental housing affordable to low- or moderate-income households. For the allocations made in response to Hurricane Katrina and other disasters, Congress required no less than $1 billion (across all grants) be spent on the repair, rehabilitation, and reconstruction of the affordable rental housing in the areas impacted by disasters occurring on the Gulf Coast (P.L. 109–234, 2006; FR–5089–N–01, 2006). That has resulted in $2.4 billion spent on the rehabilitation of over 50,000 affordable housing units since then. For the allocations made in response to Hurricane Sandy, HUD required grantees to consult with Public Housing Authorities (PHA) in the impacted region and to identify and address the rehabilitation, reconstruction, and replacement of various types of HUD-assisted housing that is affordable to low- and moderate-income renters (FR–5696–N–06, 2013). Beginning with allocations to grantees experiencing a disaster in 2016, HUD has prioritized affordable rental housing by requiring grantees to describe in their Action Plans how grant funds will be used for rehabilitation, reconstruction, replacement, and new construction of rental housing affordable to low- or moderate-income households (FR–5989–N–01, 2016). The outcomes of these requirements have not been studied in rigorous research, and applicants responding to this solicitation should include an assessment of these requirements and other Federal, state, and local efforts to preserve affordable housing stock and how they may have changed grantee actions and affected housing stock, especially in comparison with other regions awarded CDBG- DR that did not have these requirements.

Research Objectives The goal of this work is to improve CDBG-DR effectiveness for renter households through an examination of outcomes and their drivers and to assess the long-term impacts on affordable rental housing stock following disasters. The objectives of this solicitation are twofold, and HUD will fund each as a separate research project. Applicants should complete an application for the study they wish to apply for and clearly identify the respective project within the Abstract of the proposal. Following is a description of the two distinct research projects.

1. The objective of Project 1 is to gather data and document the extent to which renter household needs are not being met after disasters; to examine aspects of the implementation of the CDBG-DR dollars at all levels of government for mechanisms that may result in poorer recovery outcomes among renter households; and to identify opportunities for changes to legislation, policy and program implementation that can improve upon such outcomes. Potential outcomes of interest include but are not limited to: temporary and/or long-term housing instability, housing cost burden, displacement from pre-disaster home or neighborhood, and financial and/or material hardships.

Research proposals may identify additional outcomes drawn from existing literature that warrant further broader analysis. Some driving mechanisms may include, but are not limited to, needs assessments methods and processes, allocations of funding, budget and action plan development (including subsequent substantial amendments to grantee budgets and action plans), local level recovery priorities and program design, outreach and eligibility criteria, barriers that affect specific socioeconomically vulnerable populations, recovery and rehabilitation programs aimed at landlords that ultimately affect renters and rental housing stock, grantee and subgrantee execution of planned projects, and HUD monitoring and technical assistance, including collection and analysis of data that may reveal such outcomes and the barriers to accessing aid that may lead to them.

2. The objective of Project 2 is to examine rental markets and dynamics in post-disaster scenarios, specifically the extent to which the affordable rental housing stock is impacted by disasters and the rental housing stock affordable to low- and moderate-income people declines (or not) over the short- and long-term period (4 to 10 years) following a disaster.

The study would also examine the effects of changes to the rental housing stock on low-and moderate-income renters, including housing cost burdens, displacement, and demographic shifts that were likely caused by changes to housing stock. This would involve analysis of data drawn from multiple disaster impact sites on changes in the composition of local or regional housing stocks. This should also include an assessment of the efficacy of specific Federal initiatives designed to address losses of affordable housing following disasters, such as requirements for apportioning money for affordable rental housing or direct coordination with local PHAs, and the extent to which these initiatives changed grantee decisions and resulted in preservation or expansion of affordable housing stock.

In both projects, researchers are to assess what types of data are needed to help identify and address access barriers in order to more equitably serve renter households, whether that data is readily available, and to provide recommendations on how to collect and analyze that data, if it is not available.

In particular, HUD is soliciting research proposals that will address the following research topics and questions. We expect the most competitive proposals will cover multiple research questions within each topic; however, no single research study is likely to cover all of the research questions. HUD reserves the right to award more than $700,000 for one study and less than $700,000 for the other, within the $1,400,000 total available for both projects, if an application for one project is particularly promising.

Objectives of Project 1: Disaster Recovery Outcomes of Renter Households

A. Outcomes of Renters and Mechanisms Driving Renter Outcomes:

What are the outcomes of renter households following disasters and what recovery needs, challenges and barriers do renters typically experience following disasters?

B. Mechanisms Driving Renter Outcomes:

Needs assessments and funding allocations o Are there systemic gaps in Federal (FEMA, SBA, HUD), state, and/or local assessments of renter household disaster needs that may underestimate their actual recovery needs?

o Do renter households have distinct recovery needs and what are those renter-specific needs? In needs assessments, are the renter-specific needs weighted equally in the grantee allocation of CDBG-DR funds to programs? Are allocations to programs directed at rental households and affordable rental housing stock proportionate to needs identified in assessments, or otherwise apparent?

o Given the differences in how CDBG-DR may be administered by state or local governments, are there notable differences in outcomes for renter households that may be driven by state administration of housing programs, state methods of distribution, or direct local level administration of housing programs?

o Do methods that grantees use to determine how much funding to set aside for various recovery activities systematically disadvantage renter households? This can be answered by looking at each of the major processes that contribute to grantee allocation of grant funds, beginning with Federal needs assessment and allocations, grantee needs assessment and action plan development, housing recovery programs funded by CDBG-DR grantees, and HUD TA. For example, do needs assessments reflect recovery needs of rental households? Are the data available for needs assessments adequate for measuring needs of renters? Are particular recovery needs of renter households captured in needs assessments? How do these particular needs affect HUD’s allocation formula and grantee allocation decisions?

o Do decisions about the use of CDBG-DR grant funds adequately account for needs of renter households and rental housing stock, within the constraints of eligible CDBG-DR activities?

o What might local and Federal governments consider accounting for in needs assessments to better serve renter households?

o If use of grant funds is disproportionate to need for rental household recovery, what would it take to correct for this disproportionality and what would proportionate use of grant funds look like in practice?

o Are grantee uses of CDBG-DR funds adequately accounting for the needs of renters of color, protected classes, and other vulnerable renter household populations? Are grantee CDBG-DR allocation decisions or local level recovery priorities meeting or failing to meet the needs of renters of color, protected classes, and other vulnerable renter household populations?

Action Plan Development o How are funds for housing budgeted within State/local CDBG-DR Action Plans, relative to the needs of renter households? If disparities exist, what is driving disproportionate funding of specific categories of housing?

o Without requirements, do grantees provide adequate funding for affordable rental housing? To what extent is grant funding allocated to rehabilitation of existing affordable rental housing compared to development of new rental housing that is or is not affordable? What new or previously attempted policies and programs (such as required set aside for affordable housing or public housing) might ensure renter household needs are adequately served?

o To what extent do grantees ensure that CDBG-DR-funded housing activities do not create, increase, reinforce, or perpetuate segregation for renters of color, protected classes, and other vulnerable renter households?

Housing recovery program eligibility, design, and engagement o Recovery of rental housing relies on the extent to which landlords are able and willing to rehabilitate rental units quickly and effectively, preserving units at affordable rental cost. As such, CDBG-DR funded programs that allocate resources to landlords affect renter households and the rental housing stock. Are CDBG-DR grantees adequately reaching landlords of affordable rental housing through their programs, relative to the need demonstrated by impact data?

o To what extent do landlords of affordable rental housing stock face recovery challenges, are unable to rehabilitate affordable rental units, or decline to preserve affordable units when rehabilitation is possible following a disaster?

o To what extent are landlords prohibited from receiving CDBG-DR assistance due to non-compliance with existing requirements to purchase and maintain flood insurance as a condition of previously receiving disaster assistance?

o To what extent are landlords prohibited from receiving CDBG-DR assistance due to Duplication of Benefits with other sources of disaster recovery (ex. FEMA or SBA) that were used on FEMA- or SBA- ineligible or non-recovery expenses?

o What barriers exist for renter households and rental unit landlords to participate in recovery aid programs? For programs targeting rental housing rehabilitation and landlords, are eligibility, documentation, and income requirements barriers to participation? Are engagement strategies adequate to attract participating renter households and landlords?

o Some evidence suggests that recovery aid in the form of loans, as opposed to grants, may add debt service to post-disaster rental housing, driving up rental costs. What is the composition (grants versus loans) of disaster recovery aid to the owners of rental properties and is there evidence that this impacts post disaster rental costs and broader rental housing composition?

o Some evidence suggests there are different needs for small rental housing units (1-4 units) compared with larger multi-family rental housing buildings, and that differences in rental market composition and the types of disaster recovery aid allocated may be associated with different outcomes for the rental housing market. What types of aid and engagement work best for these distinct types of rental units? Is one type better suited for preservation of affordable rental housing over the long run? What are best practices for meeting affordable housing needs and ensuring the recovery of the different types of rental housing?

o What policies and programs stand out in changing the trend of disparate outcomes in disaster-impacted communities with high percentages of vulnerable renter household populations? What can be replicated in similar circumstances across the country?

HUD monitoring and technical assistance o What data are needed to examine patterns and indicators of potential access barriers and disparate recovery outcomes among those impacted by disasters, in order to monitor equity of recovery grants in reaching vulnerable populations, particularly low-income renter households and renter households of color and other protected classes?

o What are the sources and methods to obtain those data when the programs do not already collect them?

o What technical assistance might benefit CDBG-DR grantees in understanding the needs of renter households and program design and funds allocation to meet those needs?

Are there alternative milestones in the process of allocating and programming CDBG-DR grant funds at which resources can go toward or away from renters? What should HUD focus on as critical pathways to improving assistance and outcomes of low-income renter households and rental housing stock?

Objectives of Project 2: Post-Disaster Impacts on Rental Markets

A. Disaster Impact on Rental Housing Markets

How do housing market composition and dynamics (housing costs, rents, vacancies, owner-occupied versus renter-occupied, housing quality, community demographics) change over the short- and long-term in cities and regions impacted by disasters?

What changes take place among renter populations in areas impacted by disasters, with regard to population demographics, rental housing cost burdens, financial distress, displacement from affected communities over the short and long-term?

B. Efficacy of Government Efforts to Mitigate Loss of Affordable Rental Units and Impacts on Renters

What efforts have been implemented by Federal and state and local governments to mitigate loss of affordable rental housing stock? How did these affect grantee allocations and what associated impacts on rental housing stock and renter households are observed?

What were the effects of requirements for CDBG-DR grantees to set aside a designated portion of funds for the rehabilitation or reconstruction of affordable rental units following disasters?

What were the effects of requirements for CDBG-DR grantees to engage with PHAs and ensure unmet needs were included within the CDBG-DR Action Plan following Hurricane Sandy and other disasters?

What were the effects of requirements for CDBG-DR grantees to describe in their action plans how they will identify and address the rehabilitation, reconstruction, replacement, and new construction of rental housing affordable to low- and moderate-income households?

Given that HUD included time limits on affordability in CDBG-DR Federal Register notices, what impact might the lapse of those affordability requirements have on affordable rental housing stock in these communities and regions?

What lessons from these three requirements (affordable rental housing set aside, coordination of Action Plan with local PHAs, and time limits on affordability) can inform Federal and local-level efforts to mitigate loss and expand stock of affordable rental housing? What challenges did grantees have meeting the goals of the initiative and what solutions did they develop to overcome them?

Methodological Considerations Scope Both studies are expected to use mixed methods designs and incorporate data from multiple sources to 1) generate analyses of recovery outcomes and driving mechanisms, and 2) examine and document a generalized picture of changes in rental housing markets in post-disaster scenarios and analyze efforts to quell reductions and expand affordable rental housing stock. In order to develop findings and conclusions that can be generalized, we expect competitive proposals to describe research that examines disaster-impacted places across the nation that have been awarded CDBG-DR grants for Presidentially declared major disasters of any type (ex.

hurricane, flood, severe storm, wildfire, etc.) when applicable to the research question addressed.

To be clear, this is not a requirement for studies to be statistically representative. The scope of subjects can include allocations beginning with those for Hurricane Katrina in 2005 through allocations for events occurring in 2018. Applicants should consider the time constraints of research on long-term impacts, defined above as approximately 10 years following a disaster, and weigh this against the likelihood of collecting the best data on disasters that occurred more recently, due to staff memory and turnover. Applicants should propose an approach to selecting sampled communities and include a draft framework for selecting study sites with an explanation of how its criteria support the overall research approach of the study.

Data Collection Previous disaster recovery studies have relied on HUD administrative or Census data that limited the value of the findings. Competitive proposals will discuss how research questions will be answered using multiple data sources and multiple analytical methods. Studies will incorporate data sources beyond Federal census and administrative data, including, but not limited to, data collected from CDBG-DR grantee states and municipalities on needs assessments, project beneficiaries, broken down by demographic populations and/or protected class group, program budgets and actual costs, local housing statistics, household surveys, direct observation, and other administrative data sources and information gleaned through interviews and site visits.

Past research studies have been delayed due to the challenges of collecting data from different sources. To facilitate appropriate data collection plans, we are requiring applicants to this solicitation to describe how projects will quickly (following execution of the grant agreement) identify specific data sources needed for the successful completion of the research and how they will develop, within the first quarter of the period of performance, a feasible plan for collecting that data. Where primary data collection is called for in the proposal, applicants to this solicitation must address primary data collection activities and how they will ensure data can be collected and used for the study within the period of performance, including Institutional Review Board approval, where applicable.

Eligible Activities In support of the objectives listed above, researchers may be asked to undertake a variety of research and analysis activities, from articulating research questions to conducting the research itself and culminating in communicating research findings. Products that result from the work may be datasets, documentation, briefings and policy papers, and presentations that share the conclusions of your work and inform a range of audiences, including Congress, policy makers and government administrators, community practitioners, and the public. We consider the activities listed below to be essential in creating and completing the project in a manner that achieves its objectives, however this list is not intended to be comprehensive.

a. Research design and work plan development. Developing a research design and work plan that will effectively respond to the research goals identified in this solicitation. The development of these materials will be done in close consultation with the HUD Government Technical Representative (GTR), Government Technical Monitor (GTM), and/or other staff and experts as the HUD GTR directs. This activity can include:

Honing research questions and explaining their significance Conducting a literature review Consulting outside experts and stakeholders Developing a research design, which should include research questions, hypotheses, data sources, data collection methods, data collection instruments, and analysis methods Formulating a data collection plan, including sampling plans, surveys and pre-testing of survey instruments and interview guides, detailed data system design and testing, and matching of administrative data across datasets held by different agencies, as applicable.

The researcher must plan for primary data collection on individual projects and programs directly from the implementing entity, i.e. the CDBG-DR grantee.

Developing a work plan, which should include staffing assignments, task budgets, and a timeline of key activities

Obtaining Institutional Review Board approval as needed to ensure human subjects research protections in accordance with federal requirements (see http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/commonrule)

b. Data Collection. This work will include data collection using qualitative and/or quantitative methods that may be in-person, by mail, by phone, or via the Internet if appropriate and may also use existing data (e.g., Census data) and administrative data as appropriate. If applicable, the researchers should plan for onsite visits designed to procure primary data collection on individual projects and programs directly from the implementing entity or CDBG-DR grantee.

c. Data analysis. Merging, tabulating, analyzing, modeling, validating, and presenting data from surveys and existing administrative data sources, including third-party sources, to answer the research questions. Such analysis may include qualitative data analysis and synthesis, descriptive statistics, data visualization, business intelligence reporting and dashboard systems, as appropriate, to present the data.

d. Communication. Synthesize and communicate findings through briefings, presentations, written reports, and the production of informational tools and resources. These are to be designed to effectively communicate findings to non-research or academic audiences specializing in policy, budgeting, urban planning, community development, and other disaster practitioners at the Federal, State, or local level.

e. Other Eligible Activities could include: Developing short papers, policy briefs, or presentations on specific findings of the research that could guide disaster decision-makers at the State and local level.

Deliverables The awards will be made under cooperative agreements between the research team and HUD, which provides for substantial HUD involvement in the development and approval of anticipated deliverables. The GTR and/or other HUD staff as assigned by the GTR will work closely with the awardee on defining these deliverables and reviewing and commenting on them to ensure that they meet the project objectives. At a minimum, we expect the award recipient to produce the following products, subject to negotiation and HUD’s approval following announcement of the award and throughout the life of the cooperative agreement.

a. Expert Panel: The Expert Panel will advise on the study design, implementation and product development. It should be composed of a multidisciplinary team of experts who can complement the strengths of the proposed research team. It should include scientists and practitioners from diverse disciplines, including social scientists, disaster recovery and housing experts, and practitioners. This purpose shall be concretely expressed through the following activities: (1) advising on each phase of the study and deliverables,

(2) contributing to the Policy Brief, and (3) participating in a panel discussion for HUD staff and others on the Policy Brief. The expert panel might include, but is not limited to, the following types of experts: disaster recovery, housing and urban policy, sociology, poverty and migration studies, economics and public finance, environmental health, mental health, home construction and real estate, town and regional planning, land use planning, insurance, economic and community development.

b. Management and Work Plan: The Management and Work Plan will outline the overall strategy for completing the research within the budget and timeframe allotted. It will describe activities to be undertaken, assign staff and level of effort, provide a schedule of key tasks, and include a Quality Control Plan (QCP). The draft QCP which addresses all potential points of a Quality Control Lapse (see definition below) shall be included as an appendix to the Management Work Plan. A draft Management and Work Plan must be submitted with the application. After the award is issued, HUD will provide feedback to the awardee, and a final Management and Work Plan must be submitted to HUD within two weeks of the receipt of HUD comments.

c. Research Design: The Research Design will provide a detailed plan for technical aspects of the research, including research questions, hypotheses, data sources, data collection methods, data collection instruments, and analysis methods. The Research Design must demonstrate how the proposed methodology, including the data collection and analysis strategy, will address the research questions and hypotheses proposed. As mentioned, the Research Design will also identify specific data sources needed for the successful completion of the research and how the grantee will develop a feasible plan for the collection of that data. The Research Design will also propose the selection criteria for selecting disaster impacted areas for study. A draft Research Design must be submitted with the application. After award, HUD will provide feedback to you, and a final Research Design must be submitted to HUD within four weeks of the receipt of HUD comments.

d. Quarterly Progress Reports: Quarterly Progress Reports will document activities completed in the most recent reporting period, planned activities for the upcoming reporting period, and budget expenditures by line item (including hours worked for specific staff). Progress reports must be submitted quarterly and should be aligned with the submission of drawdown requests.

e. Annual briefings: Each year the research team will gather (virtual or in-person) with HUD staff and leadership to provide an overview of the project, project status, findings, and approach to achieving the objectives of the cooperative agreement. This will also serve as an opportunity for HUD leadership to provide input on the project, methods, and deliverables.

f. Retrospective Reports: The Retrospective Reports will document the complete findings from the study and will summarize the work conducted over the course of the project, present the study objectives, data sources, analysis methods, and results. A series of Interim Retrospective Reports will be submitted over the course of the period of performance of this project and provide a summary of the project findings up to that point. The Interim Retrospective Reports should be considered an opportunity to evaluate the state of the project and for HUD to provide feedback on the study's approach and documentation. If applicable, the Interim Retrospective Reports may be subject to sharing with divisions within HUD as well as CDBG-DR grantees. The exact deadline and content of the Interim Retrospective Reports will be decided between the GTR and the awardee. A Final Retrospective Report will serve as a stand-alone document that meets the overall objective of this project. The Final Retrospective Report should be edited and prepared for publication in accordance with HUD’s Guidelines for Preparing a Report for Publication (https://www.huduser.gov/portal/About/style-guide-for-reports.pdf).

g. One to two-page plain language summary of findings appropriate for non-technical audience;

h. Policy Implications and Recommendations: Publishable brief and presentation targeted to HUD, State and local policymakers on what the findings of the study may imply for disaster recovery policies regarding serving renter households and supporting the preservation and expansion of affordable rental housing stock.

References Aurand, A., and Emmanuel, D. (2019). Highly Impacted Communities in Rental Housing: New Jersey After Superstorm Sandy. National Low Income Housing Coalition. Available online at:

https://nlihc.org/resource/nlihc-releases-report-long-term-rental-recovery-after-superstorm-sandy

Diaz, R., S. Kumar and J. Behr (2015). "Housing recovery in the aftermath of a catastrophe:

Material resources perspective." Computers & Industrial Engineering 81: 130-139.

https://www.huduser.gov/portal/About/style-guide-for-reports.pdf https://nlihc.org/resource/nlihc-releases-report-long-term-rental-recovery-after-superstorm-sandy

Diaz, R., J. G. Behr, F. Longo and A. Padovano (2020). "Supply Chain Modeling in the Aftermath of a Disaster: A System Dynamics Approach in Housing Recovery." IEEE transactions on engineering management 67(3): 531-544.

Dillon-Merrill, R. L., Ge, L., and Gete, P. (2018). Natural Disasters and Housing Markets. The Tenure Choice Channel 2019. American Economic Association Annual Meeting. Available online at: https://www.aeaweb.org/conference/2019/preliminary/paper/YZ56fSb6

Elliott, J. R., Brown, P. L., and Loughran, K. (2020). Racial inequities in the federal buyout of flood-prone homes: a nationwide assessment of environmental adaptation. Socius 6, 1–5. doi:

10.1177/2378023120905439

Emrich, C. T., Tate, E., Larson, S. E., and Zhou, Y. (2020). Measuring social equity in flood recovery funding. Environ. Hazards 19, 228–250. doi: 10.1080/17477891.2019.1675578

GAO (2010). Federal Assistance for Permanent Housing Primarily Benefited Homeowners;

Opportunities Exist to Better Target Rental Housing Needs. Government Accountability Office.

Available online at: https://www.gao.gov/assets/310/300098.pdf

GAO (2021). Additional Actions Needed to Identify and Address Potential Recovery Barriers.

Government Accountability Office. Available online at: https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-22- 104039.pdf

Hamideh, S., and Rongerude, J. (2018). Social vulnerability and participation in disaster recovery decisions: public housing in Galveston after Hurricane Ike. Nat. Hazards 93, 1629– 1648. doi: 10.1007/s11069-018-3371-3

Howell, J., and Elliott, J. R. (2019). Damages done: the longitudinal impacts of natural hazards on wealth inequality in the United States. Soc. Probl. 66, 448–467. doi: 10.1093/socpro/spy016

PUBLIC LAW 109–234—JUNE 15, 2006 https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW- 109publ234/pdf/PLAW-109publ234.pdf;

Ratcliffe, C., Congdon, W. J., Stanczyk, A., Martín, C., and Kotapati, B. (2019). Insult to Injury:

Natural Disasters and Residents' Financial Health. The Urban Institute.

Vinogradsky, J. (2009). Public housing demolition in Galveston, Texas is subject to one-for-one replacement. Hous. Law Bull. 39, 144–146.

Weicher, J. C., Eggers, F. J., and Moumen, F. (2017). The Long-Term Dynamics of Affordable Rental Housing. Hudson Institute. Availabe online at: https://s3.amazonaws.com/media.hudson.org/files/publications/AffordableRentHousing2017.

pdf

“Why FEMA Aid Is Unavailable To Many Who Need It The Most” https://www.aeaweb.org/conference/2019/preliminary/paper/YZ56fSb6 https://www.gao.gov/assets/310/300098.pdf https://s3.amazonaws.com/media.hudson.org/files/publications/AffordableRentHousing2017.pdf https://s3.amazonaws.com/media.hudson.org/files/publications/AffordableRentHousing2017.pdf https://www.npr.org/2021/06/29/1004347023/why-fema-aid-is-unavailable-to-many-who-need-it-the-most

“Why Does Disaster Aid Often Favor White People?”

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/07/climate/FEMA-race-climate.html;

Wilson, et. al. “Flood Recovery Outcomes and Disaster Assistance Barriers for Vulnerable Populations” (2021) https://doi.org/10.3389/frwa.2021.752307;

United States Federal Register. “Allocations and Waivers Granted to and Alternative Requirements for CDBG Disaster Recovery Grantees Under Chapter 9 of Title II of the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Hurricane Recovery, 2006.” Vol. 71, No. 209. Monday, October 30, 2006. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2006-10-30/pdf/06-8978.pdf

United States Federal Register. “Second Allocation, Waivers, and Alternative Requirements for Grantees Receiving Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Disaster Recovery Funds in Response to Hurricane Sandy." Vol. 78, No. 222. Monday, November 18, 2013.

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2013-11-18/pdf/2013-27506.pdf

United States Federal Register. “Allocations, Common Application, Waivers, and Alternative Requirements for Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery Grantees." Vol. 81, No. 224. Monday, November 21, 2016. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2016-11- 21/pdf/2016-27969.pdf

United States Federal Register. “Allocations for Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery and Implementation of the CDBG–DR Consolidated Waivers and Alternative Requirements Notice Vol. 87, No. 23. Thursday, February 3, 2022.

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-02-03/pdf/2022-02209.pdf

United States Congress. Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Hurricane Recovery, 2006. PUBLIC LAW 109–234—JUNE 15, 2006.

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-109publ234/pdf/PLAW-109publ234.pdf;

Changes from Previous NOFO.

This is a new NOFO.

Definitions.

a. Standard Definitions

Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH). Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) means taking meaningful actions, in addition to combating discrimination to overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristics. Specifically, affirmatively furthering fair housing https://doi.org/10.3389/frwa.2021.752307 https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2006-10-30/pdf/06-8978.pdf https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2013-11-18/pdf/2013-27506.pdf https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2016-11-21/pdf/2016-27969.pdf https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2016-11-21/pdf/2016-27969.pdf…